Each month we select a few recent decisions of the Turkish Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) that matter to creditors, and explain them in plain English. The full Turkish texts are linked.
1. Concordat: a large contract signed during the moratorium is not "routine business"
Court of Cassation, Assembly of Civil Chambers, 2026/61 E., 2026/135 K., 4 March 2026 · Turkish text
A debtor under concordat protection signed a sales contract worth EUR 526,320 during the moratorium, without the commissioner's approval. The regional court held that the claim was outside the concordat because it arose from the debtor's ordinary business. The Assembly disagreed: whether a transaction is routine must be assessed case by case, and a contract of this size is not. The claim is therefore bound by the concordat terms.
Why it matters: if you sell to a Turkish company that is in concordat, ask for written evidence of the commissioner's approval. With approval, your claim must be paid in full; without it, you may receive only what the concordat plan offers.
2. Unpaid concordat creditors can apply to terminate the concordat as regards themselves
Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, 2025/836 E., 2025/1467 K., 15 April 2025 · Turkish text
This is the decision the Assembly upheld above. A creditor whose claim arose during the moratorium without the commissioner's approval, and was confirmed by an arbitral award, had not been paid. The Chamber held that such a claim is bound by the concordat, so the creditor has standing to ask the court to terminate the concordat in respect of its own claim (İİK art. 308/e).
Why it matters: an unpaid creditor is not left only with the plan. Partial termination restores the creditor's rights against the debtor while keeping any benefits already obtained under the concordat.
3. Auction sales: a material change in zoning can justify a new valuation before two years pass
Court of Cassation, 12th Civil Chamber, 2026/1242 E., 2026/1526 K., 4 March 2026 · Turkish text
Turkish law normally bars a new valuation of seized property within two years of a final valuation, except after natural disasters or very significant zoning changes. Here the debtor alleged such a change about 20 months after the valuation. The Chamber held that the court must inspect the property with an expert before ruling. It also held that a sale notice which placed the flat on the 3rd floor instead of the 9th contained a material error that can justify setting the auction aside. The decision was by majority.
Why it matters: creditors who push a sale forward should check the latest zoning status and the accuracy of the sale notice. Errors there give the debtor grounds to annul the auction and delay recovery.
4. Consent to attachment of a pension: no second round before the civil courts
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, 2025/4602 E., 2026/1839 K., 2 April 2026 · Turkish text
Pensions in Türkiye can be attached only with the debtor's consent. The debtor had consented, then withdrew, and the enforcement court lifted the attachments because the consent was given before the proceedings became final. The creditor then asked a civil court to declare the consent valid. The Chamber held that the creditor had no legal interest in that action, because the enforcement court had already decided the same question.
Why it matters: consent to attachment of a pension should be obtained in a separate statement after the proceedings become final. A consent given together with a waiver of the objection period was treated as invalid by the lower courts.
This update is general information, not legal advice. Prosedür Law, İzmir · [email protected]